When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Every single federal officer/employee has qualified immunity when performing their official duties, but extend it to the office of the president and suddenly it's a scary power grab.
It's not at all sudden, but it is scary.
Remember back in 2001 when the Bush administration okeyed the warrantless surveillance of US citizens on US soil by the NSA, whose charter forbids that exact thing?
Or how President Obama specifically ordered the assassination of multiple US citizens without trial back in 2011?
Or, going back a tad further, when president Nixon directed the FBI and others to wiretap the offices of his political opponents George McGovern and the DNC?
Those were all totally ok, because they were performing their official duties.
Last edited by Joe Perez; 07-02-2024 at 02:18 PM.
Reason: Added Bender
I suspect that there is probably more truth to this than you know.
When past presidents broke the law in these ways, they were, shall we say... subtle about it.
Trump isn't subtle about anything. The witch-hunts which led us to this place were fundamentally more about hurting Bad Orange Man than they were about addressing the systemic abuse of power by the executive, but you can't bring criminal charges against someone for being mean, so this is what was available.
Unfortunately, Trump decided that covering his own *** was more important than We The People, so he pushed this up to the Supreme Court where, in deference to Saint Trump by whose grace they were anointed, justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett, with the support of Roberts, Thomas and Alito did what must be recognized as a truly respectable job of crafting a legal framework for absolving Trump of responsibility for his actions while not literally turning The Constitution on its actual head.
Of course, politicians (which, truly, the SCOTUS members are these days) are notoriously short-sighted. The absolution which they just conveyed upon Trump will come back to haunt us the next time a zealously anti-liberty (and also mentally competent) democrat is in the White House.
live by the lawfare, die by the lawfare. I don't see how this ruling is any different than current established precedent and case law.
“The President is absolutely immune from criminal prosecution for conduct within his exclusive sphere of constitutional authority.”
President is free to perform his Article 2 duties without fear, or he can be stopped by law suits and politically motivated charges from performing his designated functions.
"the President must be immune from prosecution for an official act unless the Government can show that applying a criminal prohibition to that act would pose no dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.”
The President cant murder his opponents. And can still be prosecuted for crimes.
"The separation of powers does not bar a prosecution predicated on the President's unofficial acts. The first step in deciding whether a former President is entitled to immunity from a particular prosecution is to distinguish his official from unofficial actions.”
Still cant murder anyone here.
Presidents before Trump got to enjoy a de facto TOTAL immunity. Like you mentioned Obama droning US citizens, or Reagan waging secret wars. But now the Court has established that Presidents who do commit crimes CAN be prosecuted--possibly much more easily.
Total immunity for Presidents is over -- this ruling might make them act more in accordance to the Constitution, because now the Court has given a clear path to prosecution.
The aunt had her sign a waiver because she's been sued before by a friend who slipped on her pool deck. A family could be destroyed by a slip n' fall law suit, even if it wasn't their fault.
I had a girlfriend back in the day... she sued her brother because they had different insurance companies. She was riding on a 4-wheeler with him and got thrown... femur fracture. I went to see her in the hospital a few days after it happened (we'd been broken up a few months) and they wanted me to tell the lawyer that I was there and saw the whole thing, that the brother was being reckless and was trying to throw her off. The family was in on the scam. I made an excuse to go to the bathroom and never heard from them again.
The Clintons were never tried for the assassinations of their former staffers and associates on U.S. soil and only one of them was actually the president (despite H angrily yelling in public, "WE are the president!").
Presidents before Trump got to enjoy a de facto TOTAL immunity. Like you mentioned Obama droning US citizens, or Reagan waging secret wars. But now the Court has established that Presidents who do commit crimes CAN be prosecuted--possibly much more easily.
Total immunity for Presidents is over -- this ruling might make them act more in accordance to the Constitution, because now the Court has given a clear path to prosecution.
Oh, absolutely. Everyone's own personal choice whether or not they want to look like the cast of Jersey Shore.
I just find it hilarious that the US is involved in two proxy wars, inflation continues to devastate our currency, China is building a military base in Cuba, the last remaining airline manufacturer in the US appears to be guilty of... everything, and Israel is trying to start WW III, yet Fox News is comparing the fake-tanning-products of the two Presidential candidates.
It's going to be damn interesting if it winds up being the case that Trump bullying Biden into last week's debate proves to be the straw which broke the camel's back, insofar as convincing Biden to drop out and the DNC subbing Michelle Obama in his place.
She's the one dem who I'm pretty sure could actually beat Trump in a fair election right now.
The upcoming DNC (brought to you by Carls' Jr.) might just turn out to be worth watching after all.
I'm more interested in watching who folds first - the Biden family, or the D party. All signs are pointing towards Biden family isolationism and the "inner circle" pushing to protect their own interests and keep him in power. The party's puppet couldn't have picked a more entertaining time to turn into a real boy.
The dnc is fairly far off and might be a little late to switch candidates. Although I remember arnold schwarzenegger saying coming in late is how he got elected governor of ca. The advantage was that the opposition had less time to dig up dirt on him. Still found plenty.
I still think the dems are loyal to harris and it would be hard to replace her with newsom. First black woman VP replaced with a white man and also she could not be his vp. I'm not sure mb would run. If she did, she might be able to beat Trump. Although he is steaming ahead and is becoming a real juggernaut. Nice Ideocracy quote.
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
It's going to be damn interesting if it winds up being the case that Trump bullying Biden into last week's debate proves to be the straw which broke the camel's back, insofar as convincing Biden to drop out and the DNC subbing Michelle Obama in his place.
She's the one dem who I'm pretty sure could actually beat Trump in a fair election right now.
The upcoming DNC (brought to you by Carls' Jr.) might just turn out to be worth watching after all.
Remember back in 2001 when the Bush administration okeyed the warrantless surveillance of US citizens on US soil by the NSA, whose charter forbids that exact thing?
Or how President Obama specifically ordered the assassination of multiple US citizens without trial back in 2011?
Or, going back a tad further, when president Nixon directed the FBI and others to wiretap the offices of his political opponents George McGovern and the DNC?
Those were all totally ok, because they were performing their official duties.
How does one classify using a fake dossier purchased by the DNC and used by the letter agencies as an excuse to wiretap a President in-waiting? Obama and Biden were both in on the meetings. Are they immune?
How about having the DOJ collaborate with the New York DA in order to target your political rival? Does the Presidential contender take the blame, or someone down the line that he can pardon later?
Do the 51 people who told us the Hunter Biden laptop was "Russian disinformation" just days before an election have immunity? Does anyone at the FBI who held onto the laptop for over four years, declining to charge a sitting President and his son for FARA violations, at minimum, and Treason at the other end of the spectrum? Should we expect a blanket immunity of the entire family, and much of Washington DC, this coming January 20th?
Is a Vice President immune from prosecution for holding a $1 billion bribe over the head of another country until they fire a prosecutor in their own government?
If there's a failure to prosecute, which has happened over and over under Garland (BLM, Hunter Biden, border, etc.), do we all just sit back for four years and watch, with seemingly no options?
How does one classify using a fake dossier purchased by the DNC and used by the letter agencies as an excuse to wiretap a President in-waiting? Obama and Biden were both in on the meetings. Are they immune?
How about having the DOJ collaborate with the New York DA in order to target your political rival? Does the Presidential contender take the blame, or someone down the line that he can pardon later?
Do the 51 people who told us the Hunter Biden laptop was "Russian disinformation" just days before an election have immunity? Does anyone at the FBI who held onto the laptop for over four years, declining to charge a sitting President and his son for FARA violations, at minimum, and Treason at the other end of the spectrum? Should we expect a blanket immunity of the entire family, and much of Washington DC, this coming January 20th?
Is a Vice President immune from prosecution for holding a $1 billion bribe over the head of another country until they fire a prosecutor in their own government?
If there's a failure to prosecute, which has happened over and over under Garland (BLM, Hunter Biden, border, etc.), do we all just sit back for four years and watch, with seemingly no options?
If I'm reading this correctly, I believe that a fair summary is: "Lots of former administrations have also committed basically the same criminal offenses as Trump did."
Agreed, 100%. It is utterly reprehensible that this has always been swept under the rug until now.
It took someone as belligerent and aesthetically offensive as Trump to finally raise this issue to the fore of public consciousness. We owe him a debt of gratitude for making that sacrifice.
And all of this is damning evidence of how We The People have become so much more concerned about the reputation of our own tribal figureheads than about the sanctity and long-term viability of our nation as a whole.
07-02-2024, 01:45 PM
0
